Full Transcript
Thank you. [transcription gap] Welcome, everybody. We have no public hearings tonight, so we're going to go right into discussion items. No more than item is flecking residence for Chapter 219 with Heather. Okay. Good evening, everyone. For the record, Heather Trojansky, planner for the town of Riverhead. This is a Chapter 219 coastal erosion hazard permit application seeking approval to construct a beach access stairway with landings down the bluff face. The subject parcel is 118 Northside Road in waiting river. Suffolk County tax number 600-24-2-32 within the residence B zoning use district. So essentially what the property owner is looking to do, there's a small sort of floating staircase seaward of the house that they're looking to take out. I don't think there were any permits for that. That was probably done by the prior owners, and then they would just walk down the bluff base, which is not safe. It could be a little bit more expensive. So they would have to pay for the cost of the beach access staircase. So the property owner is looking to install a beach access staircase. They do already have a DEC permit. And because the slope meanders a little bit, it's interesting. They have the grade starts to slope down seaward of the house. And then jurisdiction for the coastal erosion hazard area occurs, I think it's about midway where the proposed staircase is. And then as you travel seaward, you get to the top of the bluff, and that's where the steepness occurs. So that's why they sort of have it zigzagging with multiple landings. I'm assuming that's the best practice to construct the staircase, and it provides multiple points of relief for someone who's walking up and down the stairs to sort of take a rest. And this is permitted pursuant to Town Code 219-14B3. Again, it's beach access stairs. They're not proposing any structures within the coastal erosion hazard area that would be considered development under subsection B. I did note during my site inspection, the toe of the bluff, the western portion of it, there's a bit of washout there, and I spoke with the property owner. He told me that he actually applied to the DEC for a beach staircase and also wooden bulk heading, and the DEC told him no to the bulk heading. So I encouraged him in the future to maybe apply to the DEC for an acceptable method for an erosion control structure that would essentially meet up or tie into that existing bulk heading on the property to the west, or even do some terracing and native plantings to sort of stabilize the bluff base there. Other than that, the remainder of the bluff is well vegetated. I will note that they're going to have to remove some of the vegetation in order to put the piers and stairs in. The DEC is requiring them to revegetate. The current plans propose, again, American beachgrass, which is fine, but I, again, encourage the homeowner to plant other native species such as bayberry or beach plum to sort of give it a variety and to encourage more root mat growth. So other than that... Where is the staircase located in relation to the washout? So the washout, if you can see here, the washout is in this area. So you have your wooden bulk heading here. So figure three in my staff report, you see the bulk heading on the right-hand side. So it's the left-hand of the picture, which is actually the west side of the property. So it's the neighboring property owner to the west. And my pen is right where that bulk heading is. So it's not in the washout area? No, no. The staircase is, if you look here at my staff report, I'll put it up on the camera, the staircase is going to be going in this area over here. Oh, okay. Yeah. So you say the DEC has told them that they cannot build a retaining wall? I still spoke with Leo Flecken, the homeowner. He actually walked me around the property when I did my site visit, and I said, oh, why wouldn't you do, you know, an additional erosion control structure down there? I see that there's washout. And he said he applied to the DEC for both the stairs and the bulk heading, and they said no to the bulk heading. I'm really not sure why, but I, again, encouraged him to explore other methods that the DEC might find acceptable because... Other than wood. Correct. Yeah. I might make a suggestion. Okay, yeah, Matt said that they'll probably want riprap, so... I would make a suggestion that you might tell him to. It's been very successful. It's been used before, and we use it where I live, cages that are filled with rocks. Gabian baskets. And they've stabilized very well. These last few storms, we've had no erosion. Yeah, and I think... And that's natural to them, so they don't have an issue. I don't think you have to go to them for that. Yeah. I mean, I think figure four, where these pre-existing stairs are, I think the prior owners would just walk down these stairs, and then there was a footpath going down the bluff, and it came out where that washout was. So I guarantee you that the foot traffic there probably degraded some of the existing vegetation. But yeah, I told the homeowner to explore any alternatives that the DEC would be able to explore. to vegetate the area where the stairs are going to go. So their permit isn't specific to the plan for the thing. It just says to re-vegetate all disturbed areas. Yeah, all disturbed areas. Prior to the completion of the stairs are, yeah. Yes. So, you know, their consultant from Islandwide is proposing American beachgrass, which again is fine, but I told the homeowner that he wanted to plant other native species in addition to that. I would find that acceptable. So other than that, I did refer this to the town engineer. He asked that the consulting firm and the design professional provide a stair post construction like a support detail, which they did. And obviously that will be part of their permitting plans when they go to the building department. So I do have this on for approval tonight. Does the project hamper the public's ability to use any of the beach? No, not at all. This is, it's a private property. And as you can see, I mean, their property line, they actually go all the way down to, I think, that's the Mehigh watermark down there. So, no. Thank you. Vinny was okay with the construction materials? Yeah. Yeah, they have to abide. I think CCA is, DEC has guidelines for that in their permit general conditions, so they'll have to abide by that. Obviously, you know, no construction materials are allowed to be left on the block or to be washed down into the water, so they're taking all of those methods, hay bales, silt fencing, and again, they'll be revegetating disturbed areas after the construction of the stairs.
Okay. General? Okay. I'm good. Just one question, Heather. On this one drawing here, the cross-section drawing, it just has like four locations where the stairs are going to be three and a half feet above, so it's not continuous throughout the entire structure, it's just at those locations? Yeah, so I think where the bluff base, where the slope starts to go down fast, because I think if you look at the middle of that drawing, it says 196 feet from top landing to end of staircase, and then they divide that further, so it's 105 feet from the top landing, which is in the middle to the top of the bluff. CPOD jurisdiction ends 50 feet from there, so like the beginning of their staircase isn't actually within jurisdiction, but they provided that as part of this. I think as soon as you start to go down the steep slopes, DEC requires that 3.5 foot height. Okay. All pretty good? Okay, good job, Heather. Discussion item number two, Cox Place of Worship, with Heather.
All right, how many people do we have? I'm going to see over there. I think they could pull one from over there. I'm just going to go to the other one. evening. Good evening, gentlemen. Could you just identify yourself, please? Yes, Daniel Cox. James Fox. Thank you.
Okay, so before we get into the nitty-gritty, the board and council are all aware the applicant has changed design professional, so we do have a new set of plans that was provided. It's not the set of plans that my staff report is based off of. But I'll go through the details anyway. Do you guys have a clean copy of the plans available? Okay.
Open it up right here.
Watch the mic.
And Justin, if we could zoom out just a bit so they can get the larger picture. Okay. So this application is a cycling application seeking approval to convert an existing single-family dwelling into a place of worship and also add a 3600-plot churchyard. Additional site improvements include a one-way access road, parking and paving, drainage, and then an ADA-compliant path and ramp. There's an existing detached garage on the property and also would be a good idea to have a parking and paving on-site drainage. And then an ADA-compliant path and ramp. There's an existing detached garage on
site so you'll have full head room head room [transcription gap] head room head room head room [transcription gap]
again improved with single-family dwelling it's a three-car detached garage and then there's a frame barn and a material storage area as you move towards the rear of the property so the establishment of the church churches you know unless they're specifically prohibited are permitted in all zoning use districts the religious land use and institutionalized institutional persons Act is protective of where churches can be established so municipalities can't unreasonably restrict the establishment of church so the single-family residents will be converted there are no additions going to be mean to the structure itself and then the churchyard is going is accessory to the church use it's not regulated by New York State Cemetery law because it is considered a private burial site I'm assuming to be used for parishioners of the the the the the the !
! and, I guess, you know, occupancy of each sections of the existing structure. They're providing more than enough parking on site, all 10 by 20 stalls with a 24-foot wide access aisle. They are also providing one handicap stall, ADA compliant. It's most proximate to the proposed place of worship with an ADA compliant ramp. I did note that they didn't provide a lighting plan. The new engineer has provided a lighting plan in this new set of plans. The fixture heights and temperature colors all appear to be dark sky compliant. I just, we got these plans on Tuesday, so I haven't had a chance to fully look through them. So I will verify that all of the proposed fixtures are going to be dark sky compliant. And then I had noted in my staff report existing vegetation. As it turns out, I guess a lot of those mature trees lining the property are actually outside of the property line. So I'm not sure. Obviously, the applicant doesn't have control over that, but they did make a note that any large-sized trees, you know, would be retained. You know, any, you know, existing vegetation aside from normal maintenance or the vegetation that has to be removed for the parking area, they would try to maintain that. So the plans were referred to DOT because Route 25A is a state road. I believe the applicant and their design professionals are working on a permit with the DOT. One of the pages in the new plans shows details. The existing driveway isn't, it's broken up. It's like partial gravel. So they're going to have to do some changes to that in accordance with DOT. And I referred the plans to both our engineering department and the consulting engineer. They did complete a soil boring, which is what the town engineer had requested. And then they addressed a lot. Vinny's comments in the new plans. I did re-refer them to him so that he can look through everything. And then pursuant to Town Code Chapter 275, cemetery graves are not counted as land disturbance. So a SWIP won't be required. Obviously, not all of the sites are going to be disturbed and filled at once. But in terms of the parking area and the driveway, I think it would behoove the applicant to provide a soil and erosion sediment control plan. Okay. So that they can have their design professionals look at that rather than a fully fledged SWIP. I noticed that you have a series of photographs for the property. And so the last one, which was done in October, shows the substantial clearing of the property. Yes. So I did note this was previously, it was a single family residential property and it was farmed. They had temporary greenhouses there, which were removed. You know, the property was sold. And. [transcription gap] From the area, as you can see that it was disturbed. It looks like there was some material screening going on over there. The barn was built over the course of, I think, probably 10 months. When I was there for my site inspection, all of that, you know, clearing there was no material stockpiled. Everything had since ceased. And actually the field was now overgrown. But I just wanted to make note that there was some disturbance on the property prior to coming in for this application. At one point it was a Korean vegetable farm there. Yes. It went back there. The project will require review and approval from the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. Based on the new engineered plans, they're going to be installing an IA system, and it's going to be located in the front yard. So they're probably going to have to abandon the existing sanitary system and install the new sanitary system. The site is currently served by a private well. It's not within the Water District. I just received correspondence from H2M today, which I provided to the applicant's representative, detailing that they are not within the Water District, and if they wanted to try and connect to the Water District, they would need a map and plan. The closest water main to the property is located on East Wind Drive, which is 3,500 feet from the property. And, you know, they estimate the cost. They would have to extend public water to the site to be between $350 to $400 per linear foot. You know, the Health Department would have to approve it, but they could utilize the existing well, you know, provided that the water meets their standards. I will note that even though the churchyard wouldn't be regulated by the state, sanitary code requires a minimum 100-foot separation from a burial site to a potable water source. And I believe the existing well on the property, based on the submitted plans, is far enough away from where they would be putting the most proximate graves. I don't know about the neighboring properties. All of the residences on that stretch of 25 are served by well water. And this board actually just approved the Holly Estate subdivision, which was a three-lot subdivision just to the west of this parcel. And all of the existing residents and the two, you know, new residences would ultimately be served by well water. So I don't know. It's sort of a chicken or the egg type thing. If this were to go forward, the residences that would be proposed here would have to make sure that their wells are at least 100 feet away from where the grave sites are going to be or vice versa. If these people come in for building permits on their houses and they have their well sited near the property line, that's going to change the way this layout is proposed.
So as far as the fire marshal comments are concerned, again, I provided the board with the new engineering firm's response to the fire marshal. A hydrant won't be required anymore based on the occupancy type. And also the fire apparatus access requirement will no longer be required. So I just wanted to update the board on that. Again, a lot of the new plans went over a lot of the things that I had in my staff report. So the only concern that I have, the biggest concern is the groundwater just because, you know, I don't know if this is going to be a 50 year plan or 100 year plan or how often people are going to be buried at this site, what the method of internment is going to be. You know, because cemeteries, the reason why sanitary code has a minimum separation distance is because burial yards, cemeteries, churchyards, you know, the function of such is a potential contaminant to groundwater. So I just want to make sure that that's not going to be an issue going forward. So I would like the applicant and their decision. I would like to sign professionals to submit a full environmental assessment form specifically addressing that issue before this board makes a determination of significance and moves forward to a public hearing. Will the bodies go into concrete vaults? Yeah. So with the Muslim faith, it's a very natural, it's like the most green burial process you could do. There's no embalming of the bodies. [transcription gap] You know, so there's no chemicals. It's usually a gallon to each body and that is what usually leaches into the groundwater. The groundwater on this specific property is at 74 feet. So I don't see it being an issue regardless. But of course, Heather brings up a great point and it should definitely be addressed. But no, they usually go into a pine casket, which is completely biodegradable. There's no metals going into the ground. There's no minerals going into minerals. There's minerals going into minerals. [transcription gap] minerals. [transcription gap] minerals. [transcription gap] minerals. [transcription gap] minerals. minerals. minerals. minerals. [transcription gap] minerals. [transcription gap] You know, when it comes to cemeteries, some do actually use the concrete vaults now because of slumps in the soil, but it's not regulated through a religious cemetery. So, I mean, if we had to, we would if that would appease the town, but for us personally... We're just gathering information. Yeah, of course. Are the pine boxes, are they stackable? No, they are not. Strictly, so you have 3,500 gravesites, 3,600 all single. Yes, so, yeah, and the Muslim religion as well, you cannot stack on top of one another. At what depth do you dig down to? That's a good question because a lot of people think of six feet under, but the standard today is four to four. Four and a half feet, and that's because of, you know, safety reasons. You know what I mean? So someone could get out of the hole, you know what I mean, when you put it down or whatever. But the standard is usually like four to four and a half feet. Where were you at with the approval process from Suffolk County? That's something for Mr. Cuddy probably. We don't believe that Suffolk County has the authority to do anything to us. We think they misread Section 451. Okay. The code. And I don't think they can do anything to a religious cemetery. Yeah, I've never come up with it before. That's why I asked. Well, I wrote a memo to them to explain why we don't think they have jurisdiction. Yeah, I forwarded the memo to the commission. I have yet to hear back from them, but I, you know, let them know to contact the applicant's attorney directly, and I'll just wait to hear what the final say is. So, again, a lot of the content of my staff report was done prior to this new information coming up. But, again, my concern remains the same. Other questions that I had as far as when burials occur, is there a certain order? You know, the way that the plots are laid out, do you start from the back and go forward? Is it sort of a free-for-all? You know, how are the grave sites actually accessed? Like, is there? Is there going to be vehicular access into these areas for people to walk through? I'm not 100% sure how it. Once it's established, do you sell the plots to your followers? How does it work? I guess that's really what she's asking. No, that's a great question. So, the place of worship, with that we get, obviously, the rights to burial. That gets set up as a 501. Okay. 501c3, not-for-profit. Another great thing that Heather actually brought up was, how do we know that the property doesn't fall into disrepair? You know, things happen. You know, we might not be here in 20 years. So, that would fall into a 501c13, which is a forever maintenance trust. And that's what all graveyards do, if it's the diocese, or if it's a private cemetery, or, like, that's how it goes, you know, for the most part. Perpetual care. Perpetual care. Yeah, perpetual care. Exactly. It's a fund, a reserve fund. So, it's constant. Yeah, like, the state of New York usually asks for 10%. I know it goes from 5% to 15% for religious institutions. But, I mean, 10% is, like, that good number where you don't have to worry about, like, cutting the grass and stuff like that 50 years from now. You know? And that was one of my questions. Does this grave site stay forever in perpetuity for your faith? Of course. Okay. Yes. And that I defer to counsel on this as far as if the board could, you know, require a covenant or some sort of restriction that would run with the property, or if the place of worship would consider consenting to dedicating the land for cemetery, purposes. Again, like, acknowledging that it's not a cemetery in terms of a public cemetery, but. It's not a public, absolutely not a public cemetery. It's because I found a file for the Byzantine Catholic Church where they actually, the church, they agreed to dedicate the land for cemetery purposes and that it couldn't be, you know, disturbed. Again, like, if the property were to fall out of ownership. I'm sorry. If the place of worship of, or the place of worship were to go away. Out of the not for profit. Yes. Like, and somebody else wants to buy the property. I just have concerns with what if they want to use the rear of the property for something else. If there are bodies interred there, I don't know what the rules are as far as disturbing them. Or if there would be, like, a covenant placed on that land described by Meats and Bounds saying, you know, this is it. Yes. And the thing is, is that. You know, it's unfortunate because you see it in like New York City, like Washington Memorial Park. It's honestly, underneath it, it's a mass grave. And they built on top of it. And I feel like today we understand the necessity and how important it is, even if a grave's 100 years old and it's broken over. Like, that can't happen. You know what I mean? So, of course, no, I don't ever want anything but a religious cemetery there. Forever. I think the answer is yes. Put a covenant on that. Yes, 100%. We would love to sign anything. And then. One question that I asked Eric. If, could it ever be sold to another faith as a cemetery? That's another great question. Because if the covenant, the covenant is still in place. So, you know, I'm just. Yeah, assuming that the churchyard isn't completely filled. Right. Right. Yeah, no, that's an awesome question. I mean, technically, yes. But there are differences in some religions. We have, you know, Beth Israel, Beth Moses for, you know, the Jewish population. Someone like Pine Lawn, obviously, it's all faiths. So if someone wanted to agree to, you know, and they're okay with being buried next to Muslims, which I don't see a reason why not. Of course. Yeah. If you wanted to add that. That would be great. And I know that we sort of like glossed over landscaping just because we, the engineering firm went over the trees. We put something together just for the design package. Okay, I'll hand this up to the board. I was just thinking, like, I know that typically, like, we don't buffer residential to residential, but we've had buffers, you know, for residential subdivisions against, up against existing houses. So I'm wondering, like, I don't know what the neighbors are going to think when this comes time for a public hearing, but maybe considering, you know, if they're going to have to clear some of the vegetation along the property lines for this access road, maybe installing some evergreens, you know, where the houses would be. I don't see an issue with there being no buffer to the ag uses to the east and the north. But again, I want to make sure that we're being cognizant of the residences who live here. No, that's. We'll have the land. Okay. We'll have a landscaping plan. Okay. We'll have a landscaping plan. I'd also like to add that, you know, when we decided to move forward with this, and it's a five-acre parcel, we had Griever and Ward, who works directly with the diocese, and their whole entire architecture firm is based off of doing churchyards. And they originally came in and said, oh, you've got five acres, you have this, you do this, you do that. This is what we do with the Catholic Church. And we decided, like, we don't want to. Disturb anybody. You know, we're just grateful to be able to hopefully do something like this. And that's why the property's five acres and the burial grounds, I think, 2.26, so less than half the property. You know, so we don't want to upset anybody by any means. But we expect to have significant landscaping. We would love to do that, yeah. And as always, I would suggest native landscaping, something not fertilizer or water dependent, especially considering. The well that's on site, I mean, I don't know if health department, you know, as far as the flow is concerned, the DEC record that I found said that it was 40 gallons per minute, which is, you know, a small-scale irrigation well. I do understand there's a water line that goes to the dwelling right now for potable water. So I would just want to make sure that, you know, if you're going to be installing grass or seeding back here while, you know, the land's not being used, again, like, if you're only harrowing. A few at a time. In order to maintain the grass, obviously you need water. Native species and grass alternatives require less water, and they still look nice. Of course. I also have a question. On the inside of the house, two of the rooms are memorial areas. And then you have manager, manager, groundkeepers. Are they, is that part of the worship? It's a place of worship, yes. But is it also used as, to place the body to where people can come? Wakes? You mean for wake? Yeah, like a wake type of. Do you have, I don't know how they do it. Can I actually see the plans? Are you speaking about? The floor plans that were done by. Yeah, so, no, I didn't understand it because we told Heather that the existing garage, is where we're going to be, you know, keeping flowers and stuff like that. Inside the house, that's a place to, so this is what's interesting that a lot of people don't know about the Muslim community, is that when someone passes, thank you. So this is, yeah, leave it up on the camera. So it's these two areas that kind of. Go ahead. What would you think? Yeah, no, of course. I appreciate it. Yeah, so with the Muslim community, there is no wake. So if someone passes away, it's usually, it's always in 24 hours. It's a very, very fast process. So if they pass away, they get all their ducks in a row. Everyone drops what they're doing and they have to move because they're trying their best to, you know, go and, you know, pass away and go into the grounds by sunset or, you know, worst case, the following day. So what happens is a funeral home service, usually Muslim funeral home service. There's only three in the tri-state area. They'll pick up the body. They'll bring it to the mosque. They'll wash it. They'll put it in three white cloths. And then they're off. They're going to get buried. Once they go to get buried, you know, they go into the grounds and there's really no wake to it because it's, it's more of seen as like a beautiful thing. There's like, there's no reason to stand over it, get the flowers, you know, do a huge service or whatever, because it's like, we're taking time away from their spirit to, you know, go into the afterlife. It's a beautiful thing. And like, we should all be happy about this. And they move on. They still have to get burial permits though, right? Yes. Register with the registrar, vital statistics, which in our case is the town clerk. Yes. So this is not used for burial services then? Correct. This is if you want to step away from that and if you want to say a prayer, of course, like, you know, and obviously, um, the Muslim community worships on Fridays. So like we would have services, it's a place of worship, you know what I mean? So we would have services on Fridays and bring in our moms. Um, and that's what that room's for. So there would be no, like a. Funeral procession, like sometimes you'll see with five, six, seven limousines, you know, backed up onto the road and turning into the, the, uh, the graveyard. No. And you know, it's, it, it's weird how things work out. And this is literally a stone's throw away from Calverton national cemetery. Right. It's the largest national cemetery and the busiest in the country. And my grandfather's actually buried there. He was a world war II vet. Um, but it's very. Very, very busy and it's a necessity for the town of Riverhead. Absolutely. Um, but no, it's not like that, you know, um, it's very cut and dry to say the least. You say, you say that when there's a body, someone that you have a service that picks it up. Yes. And then brings it to your facility. Yes. The facility, sometimes they do it at home. They'll wash the body. Oh yeah. Okay. And they'll put it in the three white floss. You know, we put it in. We put it in the biodegradable pine casket and, uh, then it'll come to our church. Oh, okay. So it comes already prepared. Yeah. Prepared. Okay. Yeah. And I'll note that in the, um, letter from the engineering firm based on it trip generation manual data, um, New York state DOT is not requiring a traffic analysis for the project. So I don't think it meets any secret thresholds to warrant, um, a traffic analysis. Okay. The, uh. The, the sketches that you've given us here, uh, show there's a gate and then there's a path that goes all the way around. Is that right? Yes. That's a one way access road. I believe it's an eight foot wide road. Um, we also did that road instead of doing it in asphalt, we're doing it in a pervious gravel. So we have to put down grids. It's a bunch of costlier, but we knew that, um, you know, the runoff. And you know, it's much greener and nothing against asphalt. And the question we asked before, you want to start burying from the furthest to the front or how are you going to do that? Um, I think that we're going to treat it like any churchyard or cemetery where if people do want to buy a plot, um, you know, we have it sectioned off. I don't know if the plants here from Griever and Ward, but it'll have like E169 CC20, you know, and I don't see a reason why if somebody wants to be put in the middle of the field or they feel special next to one tree, like, okay, if you buy that plot, but like not 3,600 people are passing in it, you know, it's going to be kind of. And also we're covenanting that it's going to remain. Is there a headstone that goes up also? No. And that's another thing. So it doesn't matter how rich or poor you are in the Muslim faith. There's, um, like everybody goes in the same way, you know, and that's why everybody, no matter who you are, you go in a pine casket. They're not big on, you know, having a huge, you know, headstone. So everything's plaques, which is, it looks much more uniformed, you know, similar to like a pine lawn if you guys have been there. They just put a plaque, just put something on the grave, on the grave itself, just a flat stone. Yes. So we've looked into like different, uh, marble companies and, uh, there's a casting company up in like the Catskills and stuff like that. You know, um, we've, we haven't decided. That's like another thing too. It's like, they're only getting a plaque. I mean, they should really decide what it is, but no matter what it is, it's natural. Sorry, just to backtrack a little bit. You said that the, um, access road is going to be, uh, pervious. Yeah. [transcription gap] Uh, correct. Um, cause on the new plans, they, they calculated, um, so residents be 80, no matter the use, uh, 15% is the maximum allowable impervious impervious on the chart that was provided. It shows that it's 10%. Um, and under your total impervious cover, you have 21,718 square feet. And then I'm assuming it was a typo because underneath the proposed pervious area calculation, it says total impervious coverage. impervious cover again um 21 957 square feet but as the planning board knows um and per whether you're using um pervious papers or not it's more for uh drainage and not necessarily to be taken out of the impervious area um so taking the 15 and the total square footage of the property the max impervious surface coverage would be 32 540 square feet give or take um and then if you take both the impervious area calculations and you know the pervious cover you get 43 675 square feet which is in excess of the 15 percent all right so you need to get your design professional to we can rectify that so i'd no it's a good i'd ask greg as the zoning officer to chime in on this one yeah i think they just need to clarify the total coverage including pervious impervious i mean it's sort of semantic at this point but just clarify that total and then we can determine if they need a variance for that yeah because pervy again pervious pavers still count as impervious because the function of that section of code was to allow for alternative drainage techniques not to exempt people from the impervious surface calculation heather just wondering for our engineer on that because obviously we're going to mention that to them yeah i'll talk to them um when you say like pervious pavers like this is gravel does it not matter i think it's any alternative paving technique if i um remember correctly i i don't um i can't remember the exact verbiage of the code i'll look it up and i'll send it to them but it's just something that you know again this board is aware of and the planning department was aware of you know the alternative paving techniques whether they be uh gravel or pervious pavers were meant to allow for alternative drainage provided that the underlying soil conditions allow for it as opposed to a traditional drainage structure and this has happened on other projects um where the pervious pavement um or areas counted as impervious so i mean i'll i'll clarify that and i'll speak to the engineer obviously you can have them contact me but i just want to hash that out before we move forward just so the board knows their intent is to comply as closely as they can to all of the town thank you well the driveway itself though it'll be stoned right out to where it meets 25a or will there be some type of an apron there's a buffer in the neighborhood yeah yes yes so we've got to meet d.o.t requirements that permits in the way and then his design yeah they're proposing a type one asphalt um which is what d.o.t is going to require okay so they won't don't want the rocks going out onto the highway projectiles it slopes down a bit too so i i really like you know it's not going to be going into the road but again d.o.t has to approve that and the the apron will be improved pursuant to their standards um so other than that again like my biggest concern um from an environmental standpoint is to ensure that the groundwater that exists in the well is going to be um you know tested that there are no issues with it that'll be sufficient for any supply that they need and again that the um the burial plots aren't going to exacerbate any ground border conditions so we've actually sent the water off for testing okay good analysis or for the border does the board have anything else um so the i have one last question um the current residence is used as a residence and also a meeting only no only just the house of worship and the and and one last one i saw the the material storage area here being relocated and i see it here in this latest artist rendition what do you use the materials for that's for so there's a science that once it once you do an intermittent you know once you open up the grounds um because like the ground is like a little bit of a like a little bit of like sand and then a little bit of topsoil and then the grass on top so there's always like excess fill because you know obviously there's a box so i mean is it like essentially a giant balanced cut and fill like you're not going to be exporting uh no i don't believe so i mean no matter where you go to any church yard or cemetery they usually have like a maintenance facility um i just don't know like in case you know if you are exporting materials i just want to make sure you don't need a chapter 229. yeah no i don't think we're taking any she's she's really good i emailed her too and said you know what you did a really good job she didn't answer that we want to keep the good here on the inside we want to keep it on so just one more question if it's a house of worship also and it didn't look like there was a lot of seating is there any chance like in the real near future that you could outgrow this and you'd be looking to build something in addition something larger i mean hopefully one day but it's baby steps you know what i mean um you have to come back here yeah well i'll have to come back here and hopefully we get through this one first okay all right so again this is just on for discussion when we get more information on the full eaf we can you know move forward with a determination of significance public hearing and yes everything else out along the way very good thank you gentlemen thank you so much all right let's move on to discussion item number three 1107 old country road with matt matt charters please so
That's an old country road. Wish me tonight the applicant could not be present, but he has seen the staff report and its recommendations. Should be a good day.
Good. Alright, so this is 1107 Old Country Road, located at 1125 Old Country Road. If the board's familiar, this is behind the old Blockbuster building. Last year we had a site plan, administrative site plan application and then an amendment to that application. So when they came in, they came in first for facade improvements on the side of the road. The old Blockbuster. And then they came back because they needed a grading and drainage plan to do some regrading of the parking lot. The applicant is back in to do a 2290 foot square foot medical office on, no basement or anything, just on grade in the back with some parking. In terms of Seeker, this is a Type 2 because it's under 4000 square feet. In the existing building, I think there's a nail salon, AT&T, there's going to be a bagel place going in there. Right. And then in the halls, we made them do cross access at the last stage. Yeah, it works good too. Yeah, it looks nice. They actually opened this in here, opened it up here. We have cross access in the back and I believe there's also cross access to this property, which is the old Sergeant's Rec Center. And the applicant really did a nice job. Did a nice job. Paul Pulaski is the applicant. He does nice work. In terms of elevations, it is in your packet. It's going to match and almost be a mini version of the existing building. It's light gray color. Good materials. In terms of... Did they have to go to an architectural engineer? Yes, they went to ARB last month. They approved the elevations. They need material samples, but other than that, I think they were good to go. A little bit of work in terms of landscaping. There's two provisions of the code that they just need to demonstrate compliance with. The first is 10% of the parking area needs to be landscaped. So they have some opportunities kind of in here to do some landscape violence, reconfigure a little bit. Because they have two big landscaped areas here. There's a landscape plan in your packet. They can kind of shift some things around. They meet the requirement also for the orchard planting that's in the code. Just so we don't get a heat on it. The parking that you show here, are they going to remove the other parking? Yes, so they're going to have to saw cut some of it. I know they just repaved it. Pretty much this outline is what you see. So what's happening is part of this application, which I guess many years ago they got a sewer easement from the property next door. They've finally come to an agreement with a neighboring property owner, so it's happening. Sewer line comes across the back. And then the easement I think also goes out to the road, but it's going to connect through. So the whole sewer line goes through, through this side to the next one. There's an existing sanitary system here, so that's getting abandoned. So that's why they have to saw cut up here. And they'll be doing drainage and putting the sewer line in the back. So the existing, I think the existing, parking area stops about here. Like Ray T&T. Yeah, they have a few spaces up there. Yeah, so around here they'll have to do some saw cutting and repaving unfortunately. But that's just kind of how it fell based on the work that he was doing. They meet their parking requirements, show the correct number of ADA stalls. Their lighting complies. There's really not too much to it. Water district, I think they're going to have to upgrade their service because they show they only have a one-inch water main. They'll have to do that. I already mentioned ARB. Sewer district is already approved. They need to show the correct soil, do a soil warning for the town engineer. Fire marshal just needs a fire marshal plan that shows all required turning radiuses. But he didn't have a lot of Harper to do that. So that's pretty much it. We're waiting on comments from the planning commission. But I imagine it's probably going to be a matter for local determination. DPW also, they might have to do some work in the right of way. Maybe they might have to upgrade their sidewalks, which most people have to do. I don't know how long they're going to have to do it on 58, but I haven't heard yet. Other than that, we have a resolution on to classify this as type 2, pursuant to secret, and schedule a public hearing for the first meeting in March. And no variances, right Matt? No variances, of course. Everybody good? Yeah. Okay, thank you Matt. By the way, it does say that it's up to the design engineer to decide what it may be. Yes. Well, they'll have to show their, whatever their required usage is, and then that's how they're going to do it. All right, moving on to discussion item number four, the easiest square, once again with Matt. Also with me. I don't think anyone's here tonight. An oldie but a goodie. So if the board's familiar, this is a multi-tool. Multi-building site plan, just on the edge of town. Town line's just right about here. Rockwell's Funeral Home, Mayes Farm Stand, Dogwood Drive. There's a little repair shop across the street. There are, you know, just to update everybody, it's 27,000 square feet worth of retail through 10,000 square foot buildings and a 6,000 square foot building. There's a 4,000 square foot bank and then a 3,000 square foot traditional restaurant with two takeout restaurants. As you know, back in 2023, we retained LKMA to review the traffic on this. That review remains ongoing. A bit of housekeeping on our end. Because this is taking a little while, we actually used all the funds for the traffic review, which was in the original scope of the plan. We have full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full [transcription gap] full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full [transcription gap] full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full full As you guys all know, they're proposing a traffic signal here. DOT conceptually agrees with the traffic signal, which is the DOT generally saying it's okay. That's what they typically say. There's another signal here at Winding River Manor Road and 25A. So part of this plan proposes retiming the signal, and it will line up with this. What DOT is asking for is left turn lanes here and to retain the bike lane and a number of other things. But what we're asking for at a minimum is at least give us a conceptual sketch that shows you can do all those improvements. Because essentially if you can't do those improvements, they're in a little bit of a pickle. In terms of traffic, and I also have to consider the level of improvements that they're doing and whether they can, you know, not cause more traffic in this area. I know this application has been around for quite some time. Back to you. I think it's been around since 2009. What's the latest date on your plan? The latest date on my plan I think is 11-17-23. They're not the best about giving me, I think we might have missed some revision dates. But this is the most recent to the DOT in 2024. I'd like to get a copy of it. What you got a copy of? We haven't got a copy. It's been so long going on and on. Yeah. So the layout hasn't really changed. I just have the original. Yeah. So this has gotten, if you remember in 2023 in the summer, we went through a staff report on this where they tweak some things, move some buildings around so it meets the intent of the code for that section. So it does, it's just the traffic is the underlying issue. So we want to make sure that the board is in a good, comfortable place to make a determination of significance. To do that, we need more information, which is to give us that scale. Matt, the eastern exit on a property is strictly going east. Yes. But can you enter on that one or just an exit? No. No. That's exit only to go eastbound. Okay. So if you're coming onto the site, you're going to the site. You have to go to the light. Yeah. Is the applicant aware that we need more information? Yes, they are. Okay. Are they actively working on it or? They are. Yeah. I've been in touch with the DOT. They said they've been revising and resubmitting. Does town have input on if there's a light on the state road or is it strictly the state? It's strictly the state. Okay. So I'm going to go to the next one. Okay. So I'm going to go to the next one. Okay. So I'm going to head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head [transcription gap] 25A? It would be all part of this project. So after, if they got to the point of an approval, they'd retime the signal when they did this. The GOG could also do it themselves. They will. So you're saying that 25A and Wading River Manor Road would be widened? I don't know if that's going to be widened. That's what I'm asking. I don't think that's proposed as part of this project. What they're doing at Wading River Manor Road and 25A is in their TIS, they outlined that the signal timings don't work. The yellow and green times are very short going north and south, which I'm sure everyone's familiar with. So you can't really go in either direction. You back up on Wading River Manor Road and then there's not a lot of right-of-way going east and west. It's just not timed correctly. But it's supposed to be retimed and matched with this so it'll essentially cause more breaks in traffic, which will have a close flow. Alright, so essentially we're waiting for more information before we can take the next step. Okay. And that's what the resolution before you tonight to retain LKMA. We'll get a professional services agreement. And then the applicant pays for that, correct? The applicant pays for that. When they do the study, how far east, how far west, how far north and south? They include a certain amount of intersections. I don't... This has been going on for so long, John, I don't remember off the top of my head what was included. I'm sure obviously Dogwood was included, the next intersection was included. It's related to this to the review. I mean... How long? Yeah, a long time. Okay. I think it's... We really need the right-of-way information. I'm sure it could work. Everybody good? Thanks, guys. Thank you. Okay. Item number five, Subwind Farms, Major Subdivision. Greg? Thank you. Justin, can we go to the laptop, please? All right.
Thank you for the record, Greg Bergman, Senior Planner with the Riverhead Planning Department, and we have Vincent Calvosa from the Calvosa Organization, who is here as the applicant. So this is a proposed major subdivision called Summer Wind Farms. The property is approximately 30.1 acres in size. It's identified as Suffolk County Tax Map number 600-86-2-8.2. It's located on 200 Peconic Bay Boulevard, which is just east of the Reeves Creek Bridge. It's located pretty much along the entire front of that double bend in Peconic Bay Boulevard. The property is split zone between the residence B-40 and the residence B-40. The property is located in the B-80 zoning district. There's approximately 13.3 acres located in the RB-80 zoning district, and approximately 16.5 acres located in the RB-40 zoning district. The property is presently approved with a two-story single-family residence, as well as a one-story barn, and the property has been historically farmed. Just for reference, again, Reeves Creek is located on the northwest portion of the property. On the northern property boundary, you have the Long Island Railroad tracks, and then to the east you have both the Sunup Trail major subdivision, which was approved by the board in 1989, as well as the Fox Chaser major subdivision, which was approved by the board in 1986. This property itself was part of a previous minor subdivision, the minor subdivision of William Nohile Jr., which was approved by the planning board in 1983. That minor subdivision carved out these two individual signatures. The property is now a single-family residence along Peconic Bay Boulevard. I did note, and it has since been clarified, the title report for this application did include a property located across Peconic Bay Boulevard to the west, which currently has a small gazebo on it, on a dock. That is not part of the subdivision application, so they're just considering the 30.1 acres located at 200 Peconic Bay Boulevard. Is it the same owner? Same owner, yes. So it's not buildable, is that correct? no there was some to establish that gazebo and the dock on that property there was a zba determination because they did not have a principal use and there were a number of conditions on there that i included in my report but again it's been clarified that this is not part of that uh this submission uh so in terms of plans that we've received and reviewed we have a topographic survey that was provided we have a yield map and then we have three alternative sketch plans for the board consider boards consideration uh the standard yield plan which is on the display screen right now uh identifies a total of 19 buildable lots it does include all those areas required under our major subdivision code with the exception of areas required for park dedication i will touch on that later because i did refer the application to our parks and recs department and did receive comments from our superintendent uh just in terms of the path that the development on the property has to take there is a cluster requirement in our residence b80 zoning district now again because of the split zoning on the property the clustering is only required in the rb80 portion clustering is not applicable to the rb40 so based on the amount of land located within the rb80 zoning district the applicant would is required to preserve a minimum of land and the land is not applicable to the rb80 zoning district so based on the amount of land located within the rb80 zoning district the applicant would is required to preserve a minimum of 9.3 acres that 9.3 acres represents 70 percent of the land that's located in the rb80 zoning district now there is an existing farm right-of-way that's noted in the title report that farm right-of-way is roughly located along the eastern property boundary it referenced an old neighboring property owner that farm right-of-way exists to for the purpose of reserving the tenants of the farm to harvest the crops on the land so i just recommend in a revised plan that that for clarity the meets and bounds of that form right away be shown on a revised plan i did refer all the plans and the maps to vinnie guardiello the board's consulting engineer he did provide comments so i'll sort of couple the comments when i discuss each of the plans so in terms of the standard yield map the standard yield map substantially conforms to the requirements of the town's major subdivision requirements essentially that's the as of right yield vinnie reviewed it and agreed that that could serve is an acceptable yield plan uh so i do have a resolution on for the board tonight to approve the 19 lot as of right yield how does that how does that um going the 19 lots go with the uh the uh the housing well so the so the 19 lots that that's just the yield of the property so it demonstrates an area with roadways and demonstrates a certain number of lots that will meet the dimensional requirements effectively if you were to just look at an as of right build that would be considered but that just establishes the number of lots that could be built as of right on the property so it would be a 19 lot as a right yield those yield numbers are reduced as we look at the sketch plans and i'll detail it a little bit further as i go so coming up on your screen now we've got sketch plan one uh sketch plan one proposes an 18 lot subdivision with a proposed roadway on baconic bay boulevard coming on the south end of the property terminating in a cul-de-sac this map does meet the open space clustering requirements in that it preserves 9.63 acres on the back end of the property it does have the barn on the property but it does meet the cluster requirements just in terms of preservation um i looked at this map and it was a lot of and vinnie's comments were consistent with this this is probably not really a desirable map the location of the proposed roadway is sort of around the this is the trickiest part in terms of site distances and it also would result in one two three four potentially five new lots having driveways directly out of the comic bay boulevard so that's really less than ideal it would also serve to eliminate all of the wooded buffer as you come around this bend there's a nice big patch of existing trees here very tall really healthy would essentially eliminate that wooded uh wooded buffer along that curve so for those reasons less than desirable moving on to sketch plan two again similar to sketch plan one in that it proposes a new road on the southern end of the property off of connolly boulevard the location of the roadway is moved slightly to the east so that may help slightly with uh site distances around that curve however it proposes the recharge basin again right in that large tract of trees and in terms of open space preservation it preserves a block of open space here as well as on the north end of the property in terms of preservation that map serves to preserve 10.6 acres again meeting that minimum requirement but really a less than ideal layout of the property so now we come to sketch plan three sketch plan three depicts a 16-lock subdivision with a new proposed roadway off of peconic bay boulevard right here that would serve as access to eight of the new residential lots and it also depicts a recharge basin in this area that would capture storm water runoff from the development of the roadway uh proposes four lots which would be preserved which would be served by a common driveway on the southern end of the property so this is just a clear example so this is just a clear example so this is just a clear example so this is just a clear example so this is just a clear example so this is just a clear example Again, there's some issues with site distances that Vinnie noted. I think these could be addressed. This map also does propose sort of on, you know, they would be covenanted and there would be restrictions on the property here. Open space in that large block of wooded vegetation. Again, so that could be a non-disturbance buffer, so that would be a nice way to maintain and preserve the existing views along the Conak Bay Boulevard. There is two separate and distinct open space areas. One on the southern end of the property, one on the northern end of the property. There is, again, the existing house on, I believe it's lot number 15 here with the barn. And there is a proposed development acre, which is a standard requirement in our cluster provision. So essentially this common driveway would likely end up serving the five lots. Greg, who owns the common driveway? So if we get to that point, the common driveway would be owned by the, it would be... lot numbers one, two, three, and four. They would essentially be served by flag lots. So there would be flag lots that would serve each of these, and then a common driveway easily that would be placed over it. Essentially it would be a private driveway. It would not be a town road. It would not be maintained, et cetera, by the town. Who's going to own the two open space parcels? So the two open space parcels would essentially be, you know, whoever, there could be a house that would be built here. This would be, the open space would be owned by lot number 16 here. And this open space on the northern end of the property, this would be a house on that property, a barn. This would be owned by this owner. Private intervention. The map does show two houses taking access off of the end of Sunup Trail that can be served by a common driveway. Now I know, and I'll let Vince speak to this a little bit. There is a proposed farm access easement, which is again, roughly, consistent with the location of the existing farm right of way. I believe that was done, he's had some conversations with members of the Farm Bureau. Not necessarily sold on the need for the connection to that, but as we move forward with this application, we will formally submit this application to the Agricultural Advisory Committee, which is required when we do cluster subdivisions. So that's the- Greg, real quick. Yes. That farm easement, did that include the hedgerow? So it's difficult to say because the Meats and Bounds description and the actual location of that farm right of way is not depicted on the map. I believe that existing hedgerow was probably on the neighboring property owners. But again, without that actual Meats and Bounds description located on the map, it would be difficult for me to say. So this map, between open space one, two, and the open space, area of that wooded buffer along Peconicae Boulevard, proposes a total preservation area of about 14.4 acres, where only 9.3 acres is required. So it is a significant increase in the amount of preservation. It's about 54% more than is required over the total tract. And it does have a reduced yield where, and as of right development, could be 19 lots. Developers currently proposing 16 lots on the tract. Is that lots 13 and 14 coming from Sunup Trail? Yes, lots 13 and 14 would come off the end of Sunup Trail, which is a town road, 55 foot wide right of way. It's wide enough and large enough to facilitate two additional houses at the end. I did note in the report that none of the plans show a connection to Sunup Trail. I'm not really sure that that's, I mean, that would be a significant change to the residence of the Sunup Trail. Okay. As of right, Two houses wouldn't really be that major. Correct. Two houses would not be a significant change. It would also, you know, if there was a, any type of connection to Peconicae Boulevard, I think that would really create a lot more pass-through traffic. I have a question, Greg. Yes. I like the more open space preserved on map three. But the question, I just noted here that lot 15, excuse me, that's 16, would have access to Peconicae Bay Boulevard. Where would that access come? And my question would be why not take the access through lot four? So that is a question. It does say separate driveway from Peconicae Bay Boulevard, which is not shown. Yeah, that's why I sort of indicated that. I mean, the logical place, just in terms of, I mean, the logical place, just in terms of, infrastructure, driveways, water connections to the lots, it would be logical if you're going to build a roadway, you know, a private driveway, that that should serve as access to the buildable envelope on lot 16 as well. Sure, because when this was originally done, those two lots that are up front, they don't have any, do they have any rights to say no? I don't want you going, you're asking them to put a covenant. Now, in between their land, correct? To get to Peconicae Bay Boulevard. No, no, no. No? No. Those two houses are on Peconicae Bay Boulevard. I know. I know, but now we have to get from here to Peconicae Bay Boulevard to go through those two lots, correct? No, no, no. What am I missing? These are the two lots. So I'm putting them. No, I'm talking about this one here. Yeah. Let's look at this. Let's look at the one that's up there. This is what I'm talking about. This shows through to Peconicae Bay Boulevard, so it has to go through this area. No. No, there is a 16-foot right of way that runs along the east side of the property currently. That was going to be the access to the farm lot. So on the east side of the property, there's a 16-foot right of way that's just now. Oh, there is? Okay, it's not showing. It's not depicted on the property. That was going to be the access to the farm lot. Okay. So that's the access. Okay. In review of the consulting engineer's comments, Greg and I have been talking, discussing, maybe just creating the access off of the common drive to the farm lot, so eliminate one access point. So it would be south, not up to the west. That's right. I understand your point. Yeah, because it's not... It would go south. You know, you can't... You're looking at the wrong... You're looking at that. I'm looking at that. Yeah, I know. Yeah, I'm looking at this. Yeah. So it's not showing. It's not showing from here. It's not showing that 16-foot right of way. So this map that's on the aerial... The screen's right now. Right. This is sort of a very good depiction. It's a... It's the proposed sketch three laid over an aerial image of the property. So you can really get a feel for the existing layout, where the wooded areas are. Now, the left side of the screen is actually south. So that, you know, those lots one, two, three, four, and five, those are the areas that are served off that common driveway. Again, would sort of be logical just in terms of infrastructure and water lines. You just have one common driveway to serve potentially those five lots. Again, you know, the logistics of getting to the developable lot on the lot number 16, if it was going to be on that farm road or across that easement, you know, then you have to cross the farm lot. Right. Right. So it's logical that you would just access that house. You can see the access now, but it's not here. Yeah. Okay. I got you. I got you. So kind of just moving on. I did refer the plans to the Park and Recs Department. This is a consistent statement that we've got from the Park and Recs Department, even though our code requires provision for set aside for parkland. The Park and Recs Department really is not a fan of establishing little pocket parks everywhere throughout town. It creates maintenance issues. Obviously, you know, those parks have to be funded, maintained, cleaned. So rather than establish little pocket parks in every subdivision that we review, they prefer the payment in lieu of parkland dedication.
Because as we, as the Board, if the Board selects a sketch plan as we move forward with the preliminary plat, the property is located within New York State DEC title wetland jurisdiction, so they will need approval for the New York State DEC for the subdivision. While the applicant is consulting with the DEC, they should probably apply for a letter of non-jurisdiction, which I would imagine they would get due to the location of Peconic Bay Boulevard separating the property from the wetlands. So the property is located in a potentially archaeologically sensitive area pursuant to the New York State Cultural Resources Information System. The applicant has undergone consultations with SHPO. They've begun. They've done a Phase 1A, 1B, and Phase 2 Archaeological Survey. SHPO is currently reviewing that information and we're waiting for a determination of signature. Are they using any land clearing equipment for archaeological? No. Thank you. All shovel tests, all hand dug stuff. They're all hand dug. Yeah, okay. We went through this up west not too long ago. Yeah. About 250 test holes done by hand. So to just sort of recap. In his comments, again he determined the yield map was acceptable. He took no objection to a yield of 19 lots for the tract. Sketch Plan 1 was less than desirable. Again, the location of the new roadway would result in five lots taking access from Peconic Bay Boulevard. Proposed layout for Sketch Plan 2 was flawed and the location of the recharging basin is not optimal as well as the location of the roadway. And he closed with saying Sketch Plan 3 there was some minor clarifications that are needed to the calculation of open space areas. He noted that the design has merit in that it provides the largest amount of open space area. However, there are design issues that would need to be addressed, including the location for the common driveway for lots 1 through 4 and the driveway for lot 16 relating to providing open and adequate site distance. But he did say that sketch plan 3 could be considered with some, again, some modifications and some tweaks. So here I do have a, as of right, yield map resolution of the 19 lots, and then we're here to have a discussion with the board for the board to select a preferred design and see where the board leans when they think about it. Okay. Anything else, guys? Nope. Anyone? Quick question. On lot 15 on sketch 3, that includes the house, the barn. Which, and the building envelope, that means everything is out of the wetlands, which I think we discussed, which I like. Yes. The wetlands were all excluded from yield calculations, open space calculations. The wetlands were flagged, I believe, in 2024 by Land Use Ecological Services. So all of those wetlands are excluded from any sort of development yield. In terms of the setback for the wetlands, the 75 feet. 75 feet. The 75-foot line is depicted. Now, the DEC has a, they have title wetland jurisdiction, and I believe it's 100 feet. I'm sorry, if it's, so there's a mix of freshwater and title on this. There's a little freshwater pond, and the remainder is title. Right. So, yeah, so the existing house and the barn is likely within jurisdictional areas. But any development on that property, if it's within jurisdictional areas of DEC and our town of Riverbend, that's a little bit of a mix. Right. Conservation Advisory Council. Any sort of modification, if they want to change the driveway, do any sort of additions, anything like that would require review and approval from both the DEC and our town CAC. But, yes, they essentially carve out a development area of about 100,000 square feet. The total lot area is about 510,000 square feet. Open space area on lot 15 is about 407,000 square feet. And excluding the wetlands. And excluding the wetlands to about 329,000 square feet. As I'm looking at this, I'm more and more concerned about that driveway on the south end of the property where those four or five homes are going to have to access. You know, I think we're going to really have to think about that. Because that is a really bad turn with no driveways. You're looking at maybe having stop signs or something put in just to. I mean, stop signs, you know, it wouldn't make sense. But a stop sign stopping traffic on the county. I mean, again, that was the biggest concern of both. You know, Vinny sort of touched on it. And, again, just that site distance around that corner. Yeah. You know, in terms of the proposed roadway, you know, on the west end of the property, I did put together a little photo key for the board just because it's a large piece of property. So I sort of went around the entire property, took a bunch of pictures from a bunch of different viewpoints. The proposed roadway, if you look at. . . If you look at photos number 25 and 26 in that photo log packet, that's a pretty decent site distance. So the last two photos in that photo log were me standing right at that where the roadway would come off of Peconic Bay Boulevard. The photo looking, I guess, would be to the northwest and then took a photo looking to the south. You get pretty good sight lines from that location. But the site distance around that second bend is not so great. So if a vehicle was traveling eastbound on Peconic Bay Boulevard and someone was leaving that driveway to head west, you know, people are probably doing close to 40 miles an hour around that bend. Site distance is probably. . . They're going into it to reduce speed. But, you know. . . The sign tells you to slow your speed down. Whether people do that or not, that's another story. Look at the guardrail. You can tell. You can't legislate human behavior. Right.
So, you know, in terms of how we can address the location of that driveway is something I think you really need to consider and how we would do that. You know, there could be. . . The driveway could sort of be moved a little bit to the east, but now you're sort of encroaching into the farm area. I mean, again, I think that's something. . . Mr. Cavalos needs to think about and address. And, again, I, you know, I understand the merit. I'm cognizant of much more preservation that's needed. Preservation of, you know, existing vistas, existing wooded buffers. It also does sort of balance the interests of both the neighbors of the Fox Chaser Road. You know, the people looking on. . . The people on that west side of Fox Chaser who have always looked out on that farm. . . Farm field to the west. Essentially would still be looking out at a farm field. There are probably alternatives that could be put together that would put a row of houses up there. I mean, again, Sketch Plan 1 and Sketch Plan 2 essentially did that. Developed that entire southerly farm tract. Eliminated any vistas that could be considered. So I do understand there is definitely some merit to this design. But with the access point, again, that's just a concern. Lot 15, is that where you're going to farm? So, yeah. I mean, Lot 15 and Lot 16 would both have open space, you know, agricultural easements placed on them. Okay. Is the wetlands separation, you have 75 feet. I thought it was 100. So the 100 foot is. . . Yeah, you see. 100 foot was from the DEC freshwater wetlands. 300 foot was for tidal. Oh, okay. This is tidal. Yeah. There may be some exemptions for agricultural activity, though. Because, I mean, that area, you can see the existing tree clearing limit. You can see where the property was farmed. And, I mean, it's well within that jurisdictional area. So I'll double check that. But there may be some exemptions for agricultural activities.
Okay. We've got a little homework to do.
Anybody else? Yeah. So, Mr. Chairman, thank you. You know, as Mr. Bergman stated, there were a number of considerations that we considered when we were designing, you know, Sketch Plan 3, which we believe is probably the best plan for preservation and development. We could have come in with a conventional style subdivision with multiple cul-de-sacs. And it was not the intent from the get-go. So, you know, we want the board to understand. And that from the onset of this, we were looking to create a preservation slash development plan, not a development plan. I have two longstanding Riverhead folks who are buying these parcels, the farms, who want to stay here. They want to farm these smaller parcels. They see the beauty of this parcel. In fact, both of them farmed or hunted this property since they were kids. So take it into consideration. The neighboring properties on Fox Chaser, right, they're looking out. Their backyards where the hedgerow stops. All of those homes to the south, they look out over that vista right now. And we could have put the houses right up against there and flipped the driveway the other way. There were a number of iterations of this. We really believe that Sketch Plan 3 is the right way to develop this piece because we're not creating massive infrastructure across a beautiful piece of property. I'm sure all of you have driven past that. And what attracted us to that property was making the turn around that corner and seeing the vista. The Nohale family on the west side, they look out over to the farm also right now. So the idea was to try to create some sort of vista for them too. I understand, but our number one job is public safety. And I think we have to take a long, hard look at those driveways on that bend. Well, when the application was submitted, the thought was to... Have lot 16 have access from the farm right away. The 16th right away. So you're not seeing it there on the sketch, but that would have been another access. So I think part of the comments that we feel we can address is that eliminating that. So one extra access point off of Peconic Bay Boulevard. And then also giving the access off the common drive. Now, I have built a number. I have built a number of these common drives in the town of Riverhead. I can tell you it is not a roadway where cars are passing two by each other. So this would be one car at a time. Granted, I understand the concern, the sight distance. We have traveled the road many times ourselves, and we understand it. So I'm confident that we can come up with a solution to solve that issue. The 16-foot right away that travels along the east side of the property all the way to the north, you see on the cul-de-sac, the sun. And then on the north side of the property, you see a little bit of a trail. There's an easement that goes across that access there. That was not an ideal scenario for us. But the Farm Bureau has suggested that these two farms should be connected and maybe give the communication between the two farms. So we didn't see it as a problem. We did it just to say, hey, we can do this. And these two folks that are buying those parcels have been childhood friends. They're going to be able to come up with something together. But whether that's an issue or not, we can address that as well. So I understand the concern we have to deal with, and I think we'll come up with some solutions to propose. Very good. Okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Okay. Moving on to discussion item number seven, dark skies. I've drafted a little letter that I'm going to read. We missed one. We got the license. We got one of these. This one? Oh, my bad. Yep. I'm sorry, Greg. Item number six, Lizum Associates, LLC, for a minor subdivision. Trying to send you home early. Yeah, thanks. I got to be happy. First, you'll see, like, the first one up. Yeah. [transcription gap] I'll head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head Lysam Associates LLC. The existing property is about 111.3 acres. The property is located on the northeast corner of Middle Country Road and Fresh Pond Avenue in Calverton. The proposed subdivision seeks to subdivide the lot, create lot number one, which has frontage along Middle Country Road. Lot number one would be about 14.5 acres. The remaining northern portion of the property, lot number two, would be about 96.8 acres. The property is split zoned. The first 500 feet along Middle Country Road is located in the Rural Corridor or RLC zoning use district. The remaining portion of the property is located in the Agricultural Protection use zoning district. It's noted that the entire property is wooded right now. It is not being actively farmed. The property is located within Suffolk County Groundwater Management Zone 3. There are some remnants of an old barn, a concrete slab, and there was, it looks like an old well vault on the property. I included pictures of it in my report. I think I have an old version. I'll give you the updated one because there's some old pictures on there. So this property was part of a prior two-lot minor subdivision, also called Lysam Associates LLC. It was filed under Lysam Associates LLC. Section 1 was the Suffolk County Clerk in October 28, 2002. That subdivision at that point carved out this approximately just under one acre parcel, which currently contains a wireless communications facility located on the east side of Fresh Pond Avenue. I would just recommend, just for clarification, in order to avoid confusion in the map room, this should probably just be called Lysam Associates LLC Section 2. So what we've currently proposed as part of this subdivision application, what they're doing is essentially subdividing off the RLC zoned portion of the property. Now, I do note that the proposed subdivision boundary line extends 30 feet to the north of the zoning district boundary line. There is a provision in our code which allows an applicant or somebody to essentially utilize 30 feet of land from there. So that's a provision that we've proposed. of land from a less restrictive zone into a more restrictive zone. So just from a standpoint of subdividing the property, it makes sense to essentially utilize that 30-foot rule to sort of... Is that first lot still going to be considered a two-zone parcel? Yes. So the way the code reads, it's... So Town Code 301-224 states that where a zoning use district boundary line divides a lot in single or joint ownership of record at the time such line is adopted, the regulations for the less restricted portion of such lot shall extend not more than 30 feet into the more restricted portion, providing that the lot has frontage. On a street in the less restricted district. So the lot was... The zoning district was adopted. They can essentially utilize that 30-foot provision. Okay. I did... This is an unlisted action pursuant to SECRA. I did an initiated coordinator review. We received a title report on this property last week. As soon as we received that, I initiated the coordinator review among involved agencies. I sent it to Suffolk County Department of Health Services, the Suffolk County Planning Commission, the New York State DOT, again, even though there's no development currently proposed as part of this application, the Riverhead and Water District, and the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation because it did pop up as a potentially archaeologically sensitive area. I did receive comments back from SHPO pretty quickly that they did not expect any negative impacts as a result of the proposed subdivision. So while we're doing the 30-day coordination period, I do have a resolution on for the board to consider a schedule of public hearing for this application.
Good. Any other questions? We really don't have anything to add as an applicant. We just sat for warm hours, and we don't have a question for you. Oh, okay. Tom agreed that he would change it to Section 2. Yes. I'm in relation with that. And has an application been made to the health department? Have you begun? Yes. The application to the Suffolk County Health Department is pending. We've already addressed the minor mapping revisions that they requested, and I think the only thing left to do is the secret determination from the planning board. Yeah, that's our only comment left, that we have to provide the secret determination. Okay. All right. Thank you. Now, that lot number one could be then developed. Lot number one could be developed. I mean, again, RLC is not a significant commercial corridor, but just from a planning standpoint, if there was any potential development there, I don't think it would really run. There's no plans that have been submitted to the town right now. As of right, the subdivision is not something that is required to be done. Someone, if they wanted to, they could submit. And a development application on that plan, so they're not functionally dependent on each other. Right now, any potential development would be speculative, which secret doesn't really allow you to speculate on development, so I don't really think we're running risk of a segmentation issue. I know we had overages about the school possibly using it. Yeah, I mean, we did have a pre-submission meeting and conceptual sketches. There's lots of applicants that come in, lots of ideas get pitched. And I think that may or may not ever come to fruition. I could probably count on all my hands and toes the number of meetings that we've had that have never ever resulted in an actual submission. So. Okay. All right. Good, good. Yep. Okay. Thank you. Now we'll get to item seven. The discussion items, dark skies. I'm going to read a letter into the record that I wrote, and then we'll open it up for discussion. With staff and my colleagues. In 2002, Riverhead Town adopted New York State's first dark skies legislation, which really is just common sense lighting. Simplistically put, light shines down, not up. Anything constructed after that date had to comply. Existing structures were given until 2017 to comply. That's 15 years. With that said, eight years after that, the problem is getting worse. Illegal lights are popping up all over town. Residential, farm, and commercial. As the planning board, we want to make the town board aware that these abuses are taking place more and more, not less and less. We request that the town board not overburden code enforcement, but possibly have a volunteer committee that could report to the town board's designee. Member Hogan brought up a good point to me the other day when we were discussing it. The planning board does not want to see our friends and neighbors receive fines. Definitely not the thought. In many cases, if people were simply notified about violations, they could rectify them. Most of these violations are simple fixes, but regardless, the issue should be addressed. And then I'll open it up to my colleagues and the board. Anybody? Just a question on, I assume these are all existing developments, but are any of them, new, that just didn't comply? No. Anything new complies at the time of inspection. And even existing developments that have come in for facade improvements or changes, like East End Commons, for example, where the Pickleball facility is and social services, they updated all of the site lighting and the parking lot. Many places have. Target's upgraded everything I know. The little site. Restaurant Depot, Riverhead Plaza, Staples Shopping Center. We identify that when they come in. But there are sites that haven't come in that are existing that are not in compliance. Just so everyone is aware, I actually emailed Rich Downs with sort of a list of ones that we identified that were pretty apparent. And I think Kyle DeRosa, one of the co-enforcement officers, has issued NOVs to a few of them. There's a couple in Wading River in particular that I drive through there at night all the time. And there's one in the area that's not in compliance. And I think Kyle DeRosa, one of the co-enforcement officers, has issued NOVs to a few of them. There's a couple in Wading River in particular that I drive through there at night all the time. And I think Kyle DeRosa, one of the co-enforcement officers, has issued NOVs to a few of them. There's a couple in Wading River in particular that I drive through there at night all the time. And I think Kyle DeRosa, one of the co-enforcement officers, has issued NOVs to a few of them. [transcription gap] You know, they would issue like an NOV first and see if they could get the property owner to comply. And I'm assuming from there, if there's no compliance, I don't know what the typical time period is. Well, we would, typically it's a 30-day time period to at least contact us with a plan to comply. The town board can handle it any way they like. That's fine. We just think maybe a volunteer committee doesn't cost the taxpayers anything. So code enforcement wouldn't have to go out at night and other times. You drive down Saturn Avenue at night, there's a lot of violations. The only problem that I see with that is that under the town code, you know, the code enforcement officers are charged with enforcing the town's zoning and other codes. So even if there was a volunteer committee, what the volunteer committee would be doing is essentially creating a list of referrals that code enforcement would have to follow up on. Any way in order to issue the NOV. Absolutely. So, I mean, to the extent that that would be the plan, we could certainly do that. But any time a complaint is submitted to code enforcement, they open a CC for it and it gets assigned to an investigator. And since we currently have a code enforcement officer that works a 2-10 tour, we have that ability to go out at night and check on these things anyway. Yeah. So. I mean, I can certainly take the recommendation of a committee to put together a list of referrals to code enforcement. I can bring that idea to the town board. If the town board thinks it's necessary. They may not. Maybe code enforcement can handle it. We're just trying to think of a way outside the box to help. Because it is a problem. Agreed. Agreed. Whatever way the town board wants to handle it, we'll be fine. We're just going to let them know that if they want help, you know, I did the dark skies, you know, back in the early 2000s. I could help them set up the. Committee. And if they want help, if they can handle it, that's fine, too. Okay. All right. Absolutely. On channel 22 or on the town website that there's like an amnesty period. If people, you know, feel that they might be in violation, they can come in and turn themselves, you know. Yeah. I mean, it's hard. I mean, if anybody turns themselves in, we're not going to write them tickets. That amnesty period is long since last. Yeah. We've tried that already. But, I mean, even that being said. Oh, my. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, even. Even the statutory amnesty period that's put into the code having been lapsed, we're not, you know, looking to write anybody who's trying to come into compliance voluntarily. We're not looking to give them tickets. Right. We don't wish you that. Right. And that's why when Heather and I initially talked about this a couple months back. Yeah. The approach that I thought would be most effective is issuing the NOVs first and seeing if you can sort of compel that voluntary compliance. And then we can identify the ones that are ignoring us and at least, you know, take action against them first. All right. So we'll send a letter to the board and whatever happens, it's fine. Okay. Okay. Number seven done. We're going to move into public comments on resolutions. Okay. No takers. I'll move. Let's move the resolutions. I'll move resolution number 2025. Resolution number 2025. Resolution. [transcription gap] Resolution. Resolution. a Type 2 pursuant to CEQA for the coastal erosion permit at Flecken Residence. Second. Second to move. Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. Mr. Hogan? Yes. Mr. De Niro? Aye. Mr. Baer? Yes. And I vote yes. The motion carries. I'll move. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go. I'll move Resolution 2025-009-1107, Old Country Road, to classify it as a Type 2 action and schedule a public hearing on the site plan application. So I'll move. Second. Moved and second. Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. Mr. Hogan? Yes. Mr. De Niro? Aye. Mr. Baer? Yes. And I vote aye. The motion carries. Resolution number 2025-010, Venetia Square, Resolution to Retain L.K. McLean Associates as Traffic Consultant Pursuant to Town Code Section 301-305G. Second. Moved and second. Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. Mr. Hogan? Yes. Mr. De Niro? Mr. Baer? Yes. And I vote aye. The motion carries. I move Resolution number 2025-011, Summerwind Farms Major Subdivision, Resolution Approving a 19-lot subdivision yield map for an existing 30.128-acre parcel of land. Second. Moved and second. Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. Mr. Hogan? Yes. Mr. De Niro? Aye. Mr. Baer? Yes. And I vote aye. The motion carries. I move Resolution 2025-012. Second. Moved and second. All in favor? Aye. Second. Moved and second. All in favor? Aye. Second. Moved and second. All in favor? Aye. Second. Moved and second. Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. Mr. Hogan? Yes. Mr. De Niro? Aye. Mr. Baer? Yes. And I vote aye. The motion carries. Okay. That's the end of resolutions. Right now we'll take public comments on all matters. Okay. Nobody? I'll move the minutes. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? All right. Greg, what's our secret action here tonight? So secret action was just the unlisted secret coordination for the Lives of Associates LLC subdivision that was distributed to the involved agencies last week to initiate that 30-day coordination clock. Okay. Very good. Other business? Staff, everybody's good? Yes. All right. Good job tonight. No correspondence. No other business. All right. Thank you. Thank you. We'll head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over [transcription gap] to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over to head over have a motion to close motion to close second moved in second all in favor aye all opposed motion carries have a great weekend everybody
you